Am Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:14:23 -0500 schrieb "Poison BL." <poiso...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Daniel Frey <djqf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On 02/13/2017 10:17 AM, Poison BL. wrote: > > > > > > I've had more than one spinning rust drive fail hard over the > > > years as well, though yes, you do usually have some chance of > > > recovery from those. Gambling on that chance by leaving a given > > > disk as a single point of failure is still a bad idea, spinning > > > disk or not. The point that you went from single-disk SSD back to > > > raid10 makes me question why, if your uptime requirements (even > > > if only for your own desires on a personal machine) justify > > > raid10, you weren't on at least raid1 with the SSD > > setup. > > > > I finally got tired and replaced my old laptop with a ThinkPad P70, > > and boy is it so much faster than anything else I own. Compile > > times are crazy fast on this new laptop of mine, but it came > > equipped with an i7 with 8 threads and 16GB of RAM, which I'm sure > > helps A LOT. > > > > I'm going to get an SSD (or maybe an NVMe drive) for the new laptop > > and leave /home on ol' reliable rust disks. > > > > I do have backups. That's not the concern - the concern for me was > > turning on the PC and having it completely crap out. > > > > I used to have an SSD on my mythtv backend server, and it started > > behaving strangely one day. I could not log in to the console. X > > froze. Logged in via ssh and files appeared to be missing on the > > root partition. Rebooted the backend server and it was completely > > dead, no warnings or anything. > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > I actually see both sides of it... as nice as it is to have a chance > to recover the information from between the last backup and the death > of the drive, the reduced chance of corrupt data from a silently > failing (spinning) disk making it into backups is a bit of a good > balancing point for me. I've seen bordbackup giving me good protection to this. First, it doesn't backup files which are already in the backup. So if data silently changed, it won't make it into the backup. Second, it does incremental backups. Even if something broke and made it into the backup, you can eventually go back weeks or months to get back the file. The algorithm is very efficient. And every incremental backup is a full backup at the same time - so you thin out backup history by deleting any backup at any time (so it's not like traditional incremental backup which always needs the parent backup). OTOH, this means that every data block is only stored once. If silent data corruption is hitting here, you loose the complete history of this file (and maybe others using the same deduplicated block). For the numbers, I'm storing my 1.7 TB system into a 3 TB disk which is 2.2 TB full now. But the backup history is almost 1 year now (daily backups). As a sort of protection against silent data corruption, you could rsync borgbackup to a remote location. The differences are usually small, so that should be a fast operation. Maybe to some cloud storage or RAID protected NAS which can detect and correct silent data corruption (like ZFS or btrfs based systems). -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred.
